Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCVRC Min 2007/09/04 CC MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION September 4, 2007 6:00 P.M. Adjourned Regular Meetings of the City Council and the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation were called to order at 6:16 p.m. in the Police Department Community Room, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers: Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, Rindone (arrived at 6:10 p.m.), and Mayor Cox Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation Directors: Munoz, Paul, Reyes, Rooney, Salas, and Chair Lewis ABSENT: Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation Director Desrochers ALSO PRESENT: City ManagerlExecutive Director Garcia, City Attorney/General Counsel Moore, City Clerk Bigelow, Senior Deputy City Clerk Peoples, Acting Community Development Director Hix, Redevelopment Manager Crockett, Principal Community Development Specialist Lee, and Planning and Building Director Sandoval PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE PUBLIC COMMENTS Steve Molski, Chula Vista resident representing the Coalition of Mobilehome Owners, asked the Mayor and Council to review and bring back a report for mobilehome park tenants on Assembly Bill 1542 (Evans) and "Senate Bill 981 (Padilla). CONSENT CALENDAR (Item I) I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the City Council and Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation for March 22, 2007, April 12,2007, April 26, 2007, May 24,2007 and June 14,2007. Staff recommendation: The City Council and CVRC approve the minutes. ACTION: Deputy Mayor Rindone moved to approve the minutes. Councilmember Castaneda seconded the motion, and it carried 8-0-3 on the minutes of March 22, April 12, May 24 and June 14, with Directors Munoz, Reyes and Salas abstaining because they were not on the CVRC at the time of the meetings; and 7-0-4 on the minutes of April 26, with Councilmember Castaneda abstaining because he was not present at the meeting and Directors Munoz, Reyes and Salas abstaining because they were not on the CVRC at the time of the meetings. "_..__J WORKSHOP 2. Discussion on the Reorganization of Community Development/Redevelopment and the Roles and Responsibilities of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation. City Manager/Executive Director Garcia discussed the proposed reorganization of the Community Development Department into the Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority, which would also provide staffing for the CVRC and Redevelopment Advisory Committee (RAC). The Community Development Department would be replaced by Redevelopment, which would have the primary responsibility for implementing the redevelopment plan in Chula Vista. planning functions would be placed back under the Planning Department, economic development would be centralized in the City Manager's office. The City Manager would continue to hold the responsibilities of both the City Manager and Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency. Additionally, there would be a Deputy Director position in charge of administration. The proposal also included the removal of staff from under the City umbrella to become at-will employees of the Redevelopment Agency. The redevelopment and housing project staff assignments were then presented, along with the roles and responsibilities of the CVRC. Also proposed were adding tentative maps to the planning side; and the ability to enter into contracts with consultants, contractors and vendors, solicit participation by developers through requests for quotes and requests for proposals, and acquire property, not through eminent domain on the redevelopment side. Next, City Manager Garcia outlined the current process to approve a tentative map and the proposed delegation of tentative map approvals to the CVRC in order to streamline the process. The current process is a very intensive public participation process in that a project has to go before the Redevelopment Advisory Committee, through the public hearing process, then the CVRC reviews it and goes through the decision-making process, and then another hearing and review is held at the Council level. The overall process for the developer is 90-120 days, and the proposed change is being recommended to reduce this time by one-third. City Manager/Executive Director Garcia then reviewed the proposed additions to the CVRC roles and responsibilities. Councilmember Ramirez asked that color copies be provided in the future when staff reports state that there are distinguishing colors. City Manager/Executive Director Garcia clarified that the items presented were only recommendations. If the Council decided to move forward with the recommendations, staff would incorporate them into the bylaws and bring them back for adoption. Councilmember Castaneda expressed concern about the bylaws, which were established when it was envisioned that the Council would be part of the process; they provided more latitude because five publicly-elected officials were on the board. City Manager/Executive Director Garcia restated that the Redevelopment Agency was a failed process that was not working and needed to be fixed. The proposed structure would ensure that projects moved forward to a successful completion. WORKSHOP (Continued) Page 2 - Council/CYRC Minutes September 4, 2007 WORKSHOP (Continued) Councilmember Ramirez commented that the failure of the Redevelopment Agency was due to the lack of public trust. City Manager Garcia confirmed the lack of trust due to the failures over many years. He explained that the Agency depended on private sector funding, so the dynamic needed to be changed to convince the community, as well as the developers and banks, that redevelopment in Chula Vista was a good thing. The proposed reorganization and recommendations would assist in accomplishing this. In concluding his presentation, City Manager Garcia stated that staff also wanted to include an appeal process to address concerns with decisions made by the CVRe. Such a process would mirror the Planning Commission appeal process, and decisions would be appealable to the City Council. Susan Luzzaro, Chula Vista resident, requested a reevaluation of the selection process for Redevelopment Advisory Committee members, stating it was not appropriate to have real estate lobbyists serving on the committee. She also encouraged the Council not to give up its decision- making powers. Steve Molski, Chula Vista resident, stated that he did not see any blighted areas in Chula Vista; that he was opposed to the Council granting authority to anyone, especially outsiders; and that the working class people needed more consideration. Councilmember Ramirez stated that it was important for the public to understand that the elected officials were accountable to the public, and that the City Manager was accountable to the Council and did not do anything unless instructed to do so by them. He further stated that the public needed to hold the Council accountable. Norberto Salazar, Chula Vista resident representing the Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association, stated that giving the CVRC additional authority was a bad idea. Political appointees who were not accountable to the public should not be allowed to make decisions. Jackie Lancaster, Chula Vista resident, stated that most of the tax increment went back to the Redevelopment Agency for more redevelopment and not the citizen's benefit. Further, citizens did not want the City to become a grid-locked metropolis; and the Council should represent the citizens and not have the CVRC making decisions or it will become a Centre City Development Corporation as in San Diego, with the City being turned over to developers. Theresa Acerro, Chula Vista resident and President of the Southwest Chula Vista Civic Association, stated that her membership voted to dissolve the CVRC and had concerns with any decision-making process being turned over to a body not comprised of Chula Vista residents. She further stated that the Council was distancing itself, thereby creating a greater lack of trust. Patricia Aguilar, Chula Vista resident representing Crossroads II, stated that her organization supported the proposed staff reorganization, but did not support the proposed increase in responsibility to the CVRC, especially with regard to planning functions. Peter Watry, Chula Vista resident, stated that the Council could not delegate final authority to people who lived outside the City, as it was illegal, and if not, it was wrong and unacceptable to have someone who lives elsewhere make final decisions over elected officials. Page 3 - Council/CVRC Minutes September 4, 2007 WORKSHOP (continued) Frank Zimmery, Chula Vista resident, stated that the Council assured residents that its members would sit on the CVRC to protect the interests of Chula Vista citizens, and that the Council would be the authoritative body of the Redevelopment Agency, but the proposal placed the authority in the hands of the CVRC. He proposed that, rather than looking at ways to expand the CVRC, the Council should look at ways to eliminate it, as it was not responsible to the citizens and the proposal was regressive. Further, he stated that elected officials held the responsibility and should not delegate it to others. Pamela Bensoussan, Chula Vista resident representing the Northwest Civic Association, stated that her organization supported the recommendations to eliminate the Community Development Department and reorganize staff. Further, there was a big need in the west for park acquisition and development fees and transportation development impact fees like in the east, which, when put into place, would have a positive effect. Lastly, she stated that trust could not be grown in the community without keeping the pledge of accountability and by transferring the tentative map decision making to the CVRC. Earl Jentz, Chula Vista resident, provided his perspective on redevelopment, stating that more and not less accountability was needed. Tax increment funds needed to go to the community, and the shifting of responsibility as proposed created distrust. Mr. Jentz then provided a handout from his attorney that stated that Chula Vista Charter Section 602( d) requires all members of City boards and commissions with decision-making authority to be City residents. City Attorney/General Counsel Moore responded to the comments and handout, stating that the Charter provision quoted pertained to City boards and commissions, not non-profit corporations such as the CVRC. Further, under the Map Act, the Council was allowed to delegate responsibility if the decision was made to do so. It would be delegated by ordinance to the non- profit, which was different than what was in the Charter. Further, when the CVRC was formed, research was found in court cases that allowed governmental agencies to delegate to non-profit corporations, and there were case law and Attorney General decisions that stated there was no requirement for members to be residents of the City. Additionally, decisions made by the CVRC were appealable to the Council, so they were not considered to be final decisions. Peter Watry, Chula Vista resident, stated that the City Attorney was wrong. The City of San Diego delegated a lot of authority to the CCDC, and to be on the CCDC, members were required to be residents of the City of San Diego. Kevin O'Neill, Chula Vista resident, stated that the Redevelopment Agency attempts had been dysfunctional, and something had to be done to move forward. Redevelopment and development would be the salvation of the City, and industry and commerce were needed in order to provide jobs and sales tax to the City to allow for the things that everyone wanted. He encouraged the Council to try something new. Jose Preciado, Chula Vista resident and president of the South Bay Forum, stated that he cared deeply about the recommendations and concerns of those who had spoken prior to him, but that everyone needed to work together to move forward and meet the challenges facing the City. Mr. Preciado stated that while he did not see the appointees as negative individuals in the process, he was concerned about delegating authority, as the speakers before him had expressed concerns about trust. Page 4 - Council/CVRC Minutes September 4, 2007 I . ." WORKSHOP (Continued) Jack Stanley agreed that the Redevelopment Agency had not worked, stating that Chula Vista was, without question, the worst place to get a permit. He stated that a policy needed to be established for a property owner whose plans met code to be able to have a permit within two weeks. Josie Calderon, Chula Vista resident representing the Mexican American Business Association, stated that citizens needed to trust the judgment of the Mayor and Council in appointing members to the CVRC who will do the right thing, and she cited CVRC Director Paul as one of the strongest advocates for the South Bay. Ms. Calderon acknowledged that change was hard, but that the Council was elected to make decisions for those who elected them to do so. Although many citizens were present at the meeting, there were many more who do not speak out or attend meetings, but who requested change and elected the City Council to bring that change as they see fit. People needed to trust those who are appointed by their elected officials. Susan Lazarro, Chula Vista resident, stated that the logic of "streamlining" was not solid, was basically disenfranchising residents, and that there needed to be more real public participation. She then stated that two members of the RAC were paid lobbyists and had already made decisions on projects prior to hearing public input. At 8:07 p.m., Mayor Cox recessed the meeting. At 8:22 p.m., she reconvened the meeting with all members except Director Desrochers present. She asked staff to respond to comments by speakers, as follows: I) what money from the Redevelopment Agency is used for, 2) who has final authority on a project, 3) whether the UCSP plan was flawed, 4) the appeal process to the City Council, and 5) how the recommendations provide more accountability. Redevelopment Manager Crockett explained historically how redevelopment monies have been used, the majority towards the bayfront. Councilmember McCann suggested that the historical perspective be updated and reintroduced to the RAC, CVRC, and public groups. He then reiterated that successful redevelopment would provide funding to fill potholes, build sidewalks and streets where there are none, and attract restaurants. City Manager Garcia said he believed there were ways to improve the Urban Core Specific Plan. While he was not yet with the City during the process, he understood that there were some things that were not addressed or delayed, but he felt there was nothing that could not be fixed. He also explained that the Council would still have the final authority on all decisions for a project. The key would be to have the technical work in terms of soliciting developers, initial plans, dealing with architects and engineers, conceptual development, and the nuts and bolts of developing redevelopment projects be vested with the CVRC. The final authority on the approval of developers, development agreements, financing plans, and redevelopment projects would still be vested with the Council, particularly with regard to money, financing and land use changes. He also commented that the appeal process was designed to allow people who were not satisfied with a decision made by the CVRC (developer or community group) to appeal that decision to the Council, similar to the process utilized with the Planning Commission. Councilmember Ramirez asked why autonomy, as mentioned in the staff report, was important. Mr. Crockett explained that the idea was to work in the public eye, move projects forward, and reach decisions using Council direction as identified in the strategic plan and budget in order to eliminate redundancies in the process. City Manager Garcia further explained that the autonomy meant to refer merely to organizational autonomy, meaning that staff would work for the Executive Director of the CVRC. Page 5 - Council/CVRC Minutes September 4,2007 WORKSHOP (continued) CVRC Chair Lewis requested comments by CVRC members. Director Munoz, a licensed civil engineer, stated that normally a tentative map was 100% prepared by staff following City ordinances, codes and municipal requirements. It then went to the governing authority for final approval, and the conditions of approval were built into the final map. A licensed civil engineer would then be required to sign and stamp the map. He stated that two licensed civil engineers currently serve on the CVRC Board, and both were familiar with the process. Lastly, he stated that he hoped, as a CVRC Director, to use his expertise and knowledge to present projects to the Council for final approval. Director Salas stated that he had applied to be on the CVRC Board due to concerns about what was and was not happening on the west side of Chula Vista. He had observed an influx of "poverty retail," such as check cashing businesses that did not sustain a living wage. Further, he was committed to looking at a project to determine if it would benefit those living in the area today; if not, he would not support the project. He mentioned that trust was paramount, and the Council needed to trust those they appointed. The Council would continue to control the purse strings, set policy and make the final decisions. Councilmember Ramirez stated for the record that while he trusted all of the CVRC members, the community needed to trust the Council; and he believed it was the responsibility of the Council to build the trust with the community so that the City could move forward. He said he believed the trust needed to be built prior to passing on tools to the CVRe. Director Paul stated that the seven CVRC Directors had a combined professional experience of over 200 years, offered gratis to the community as public servants. The Directors took their positions on faith that the City as a whole wanted redevelopment to succeed. He believed that because of Chula Vista's size and location, there was ample opportunity to put money into the City and address community needs. He stated that more should be done to invite both public and private partnerships to invest in infrastructure; and that developers would come when they felt there was a degree of fairness and they could obtain a return on investments. He pointed out that redevelopment was successful in many cities throughout the state and should be given a chance in Chula Vista. Director Reyes stated that he was a Chula Vista resident and business owner investing his personal time in the community, and that he saw the need to streamline the process and make it simple in order to make it successful. He encouraged anyone interested to contact him directly, should they want to get to know him better or if they had any questions. Director Rooney stated that he chose to become involved because of the possibility of making exciting things happen in the City, and that his heart was here, even though he was not a resident. He described his expertise in architecture/planning and expressed his view that the CCDC was not a bad example of redevelopment. He stated that he was committed to listening to the community and would not ignore Council direction or citizen input. He said that tentative maps would be evaluated based on the General Plan and Urban Core Specific Plan and would have to conform to all requirements therein. Having served on the CVRC for the last two years, he said he had experienced the lack of results due to a structure that bogged projects down, and he commended the Council and City Manager for taking action to remedy the situation. Page 6 - Council/CYRC Minutes September 4, 2007 WORKSHOP (continued) Chair Lewis stated that the CVRC members had tried to work as a tool for the Council to get something done that had not been successfully done before and also to help the Council earn the community trust. If the proposed changes would facilitate and expedite the process, making sure projects went forward with limited obstacles, and provided predictability on the part of the Council, staff and community, they would be welcome changes. Further, he stated that responsibility and accountability could not be delegated, only authority. Successful private- sector companies appoint people to make decisions and then they get out of their way and allow them to do what they do. The results are that everybody wins. He encouraged the Council to vest the CVRC with responsibilities and then let them get the job done. Councilmember Ramirez stated that Chairman Lewis' comments were compelling except he believed that trust was not yet earned, a good framework had not yet been established, the Urban Core Specific Plan was horribly flawed, and fundamental elements were missing in order to be able to go forward. He believed the CVRC members were the experts, but that the Council had to build trust with the community before handing off responsibility. Councilmember Castaneda stated that he was struggling to come up with the right mix to create the right environment for the CVRC so that when the projects came forward, they could be reviewed and the right decisions made for the community. He expressed concerns regarding finances and what property might be purchased during the course of the year, and the types of contracts that could be let. He said he would like to limit contracts on consultants to be land-use only. He then thanked the CVRC members and expressed his trust in them for committing their time to try to help the City. Councilmember McCann spoke regarding the need for everyone to work together to bring good things to the west side, while facing certain facts like the budget shortfall, decaying streets, and boarded-up restaurants and businesses. He stated that he believed that there were more things agreed upon than disagreed upon, and that now was the critical time, since if something is not done, the west side and older areas would become more costly and difficult to revitalize. The only option was for everyone to come together as a community and tackle it now. Further, he stated that a well-run redevelopment program was needed to provide quality projects and attract restaurants, bookstores, and amenities that were wanted. Deputy Mayor Rindone summarized that there was agreement that the Redevelopment Agency had not achieved the expected goals over the years, that changes needed to be made to jumpstart the process, and that the RAC had been an excellent outcome of the process. He further stated that he saw the potential to structure a process that was significantly beneficial to the community. With the redesign of the CVRC, he saw seven outstanding members committed to assisting the City. He did not believe the concern about the tentative map was as critical as eliminating what he viewed as the major distraction that had caused the Redevelopment Agency to be unsuccessful, which was lack of direction on the part of the staff and the Council. He then noted that the new City Manager came from the largest redevelopment agency in California and understood the value ofthe agency and how to accomplish what needed to be accomplished to be successful. In closing, he stated he was encouraged about a new City Manager who wanted to make a difference; a City staff being reorganized to provide the process; a strong community voice via the RAC; an area of expertise second to none, and similar to a lot of other successful city redevelopment agencies, assembled in this City, unique to this City, and very dedicated to this City; and a commitment from the Council to do whatever was possible to move redevelopment forward. Page 7 - Council/CVRC Minutes September 4, 2007 WORKSHOP (continued) Councilmember Ramirez stated he was optimistic but felt that the downside to not spending the time and making the effort to get and build consensus with the community upfront would make things counterproductive. Further, he stated that there was a gap in accountability, and to remove the decision making a step further would not be good for the community at this time. Mayor Cox noted a memo from the City Attorney stating that the legislative body could not delegate its essential legislative functions, such as making or changing laws, but could delegate the quasi-legislative, quasi-judicial and administrative functions as long as there were standards in place. She then reviewed the proposed changes to the CYRC roles and responsibilities, stating that she fully supported the City Manager's recommendations, as he was hired based on his experience and expertise. She suggested that the CYRC hold a joint workshop with the RAC to talk about their working relationship. She also encouraged the Council to direct the City Manager to work with the City Attorney to revise the bylaws so that the substance of the decisions could be forwarded to the CYRC, putting the tentative map in a holding pattern only if necessary. City Manager Garcia stated that he would proceed with drafting the bylaws and present them to the CYRC for approval and recommendation to the Council for amendments, deletions and formal action. OTHER BUSINESS 3. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS City Manager Garcia advised the Council that the City was in the midst of a budget challenge and that he had spoken with the bond insurers and reassured them that the problem would be under control, with a plan in place by the end of the calendar year and the shortfall corrected by the end of the fiscal year. Additionally, he had met with over 600 City employees over the past few weeks and implemented four major initiatives, which were to make the hiring freeze permanent; look at department reorganizations that affect seven departments, including the City Manager's Office; propose an early retirement program being developed by Human Resources; and request all departments to prepare plans to reduce their expenditures by 10%. Work sessions would be held with the Council in October, and approval would be requested the first of November. Additionally, he stated that everyone in the organization was engaged in the discussions, and that he had met with the unions, Department Heads, and managers, who were all working to present solutions. 4. MA YOR'S/CHAIRMAN'S REPORTS Mayor Cox stated that the Department of Mayor and Council would also be looking at a 10% budget reduction, and she anticipated having an item on the agenda in October for the Council's consideration. Chair Lewis stated that he was pleased to have not only a new City Manager but also a Chief Executive Officer, in the truest sense of the word, to assist with redevelopment and that he and the CYRC Board welcomed City Manager Garcia and looked forward to having a close working relationship with him. Page 8 - Council/CYRC Minutes September 4, 2007 .~- _._-~-,_. .. OTHER BUSINESS (Continued) 5. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember McCann thanked the public and CVRC members, as well as City Manager Garcia, for their participation in the workshop. ADJOURNMENT At 9:57 p.m., Mayor Cox adjourned the City Council to the Regular Meeting of September 11, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, and Chair Lewis adjourned the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation to its Regular Meeting of September 27, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, noting that the Regular Meeting of September 13, 2007 had been cancelled. CX~~~ Lori Anne Peoples, MMC, Senior Deputy City Clerk Page 9 - Council/CYRC Minutes September 4, 2007 __J